 Poster: A snowHead
|
In an extraordinary open letter to The Guardian newspaper, the US website SkiRacing.com has accused the publication of plagiarism.
The letter alleges that The Guardian indulged in "unauthorized borrowing of material from our Web site." The claim is that an article of 4 October used quotes (from Bode Miller) obtained exclusively by Ski Racing.
Here is their open letter.
The degree to which publications may ethically/legally summarise or extract from copyright work is primarily dictated by 'fairness'. In this case The Guardian did not credit the quotes to Ski Racing, which appears to have caused their annoyance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Sounds fair enough to me. Credit where credit is due.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
On the face of it this looks a bit embarrassing for Duncan Mackay, the journalist concerned - though one would have to look at his raw copy to know whether a mention of Ski Racing was deleted in the sub-editing process.
Much 'unauthorised borrowing' (which was a diplomatic phrase to use!) goes on in journalism. If credit is given to the publication that obtained the quotes (and in this case Ski Racing say they'd flown a reporter on a mission) there's rarely a fuss. It's considered 'fair use', provided that the quotes are not extensively 'borrowed'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| It's considered 'fair use', provided that the quotes are not extensively 'borrowed'. |
So, is quoting most of an article, but heading it as a quote from the original source, considered fair use?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Probably depends on the circumstances. Give an example and we can take a look at it.
As I've said, if credit is given - particularly with a hyperlink to the source in the case of the www - then there is normally no complaint from the copyright-holder's point of view. If extensive use of copyright material is made, that may be another matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
So the correct way to do it would be as demonstratedhere on snowHeads by PG. 
Shouldn't a sub-editor know not to delete sourcing information?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DG - I thought not, in that even if the law is a little hazy on the subject, there's a 'fair use' convention (unwritten as far as I know) that would mean substantial quotes (most of the original article) required written confirmation from the source.
Ian - actually in that example I did wonder if I was close to crossing the line.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let's look at the core of the thing. As far as I can gather from what Ski Racing is saying, they got this massive scoop - of Bode Miller endorsing (or at least nearly endorsing) the use of an illegal performance-enhancing drug - by interviewing him exclusively.
That story - specifically the transcript of the interview - has substantial value. This is proven by the wide reportage of Bode Miller's views. And we only know an extract of those views from what's been placed on the web. Ski Racing would certainly wish to protect their copyright and commercial interests vigorously. There's presumably a full interview with him in their magazine.
Essentially, Ski Racing is a subscriber publication with a good website to give a taste of what's inside. They need subscription income to finance their independent journalism.
It's a really important story that could dominate the Turin Olympics if the organisers aren't careful - because of the very stringent Italian laws against doping.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
David, is it Ski Racing or Bode Miller that holds copyright on Bode Miller's words - or would there have been a contract signed whereby Bode transferred copyright to Ski Racing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bode Miller certainly wouldn't own - or, more to the point, control - his interview, unless a contract to that effect exists. The cat's well and truly out of the bag, from his perspective!
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Copyright in the article will either be with the journalist (if a freelancer) or more likely in this case, held by the magazine. As a general rule of thumb a lot of people reckon that less than 400 words is fair use - but in the context of a short article that could well be the majority of the work. I can see why they're hacked off with the Guardian, since every direct quote on their website has been lifted out and re-used. Bad Guardian (waggles finger). On the other I haven't seen the full article in the paper edition, so the reprinted quotes could be a tiny proportion of the whole thing. But they really ought to have attirbuted the quotes.
Ok, bored now.... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Quote: |
| As a general rule of thumb a lot of people reckon that less than 400 words is fair use... |
Not sure I'd agree with that. In this instance around 100 words of Bode Miller quotes were used. The quotes of Sarah Lewis were, I think, released to the media generally.
I think the essence of this is the significance of the words and value of the scoop, which is encapsulated in a couple of sentences. It's the lack of credit which is crucial. And The Guardian appears to have been caught out by its website, rather than the paper, assuming Ski Racing don't get the printed version.
Such is the power of the web in spotting 'unauthorised borrowing'!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David, the same is true of students - they used to believe I couldn't use google
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
